Evil Exists Only in the Eye
of the Beholder.
Scott Bonn, Ph.D.
Evil
is not a universal truth. It is a socially
constructed concept and it only exists in a particular time and place. This perspective on evil, known as social
constructionism, is rooted in the philosophical writings of Immanuel Kant. According to Kant, matter does not exist in
its own right. Instead, all matter is a
product of the mind. Because all objects
are constructed of matter, all objects are thus mental creations.
Social
constructionism emerged over the past forty years as a sociological theory of
knowledge that considers how social phenomena develop in particular social
contexts. According to this perspective,
all knowledge, including the most basic, taken-for-granted common sense
knowledge of everyday life, is actually constructed and reinforced through
social interaction. Social
constructionists see reality as a dynamic and constantly contested process—that
is, reality is reproduced by people acting on their knowledge and their
socially constructed interpretations of it.
As
a logical extension, social constructionism contends that social problems do
not exist objectively like a mountain or a river. Rather, they are constructed by the human
mind, socially created or constituted by the definitional process. Therefore, the objective existence of a
harmful condition such as a disease does not, in and of itself, constitute a
social problem. From the social
constructionist perspective, an objective condition does not constitute a
social problem unless it is defined as such by the members of a society in a
particular context. Moreover, an
objective condition does not even have to exist to be defined as a problem. That is, if something is thought to exist and
it elicits fear, then it is real despite the fact that it does not exist
objectively. The witch hunts in colonial
New England are an example of a non-objective, socially constructed crisis. From a constructionist perspective, what
makes a condition a social problem is the degree of felt concern by a
society about that condition, regardless of whether it actually exists or
whether it is objectively harmful.
Significantly, an analysis of the social construction of evil provides
an understanding of the processes and mechanisms by which those in power and
authority in society can demonize a
particular group and establish an evil identity for it in the public
consciousness. The word
evil itself has a long linguistic history.
The Oxford English Dictionary attributes the original derivation
of the word evil to the Goths of the 4th century A.D. who defined it
as “exceeding due measure” or “overstepping proper limits.” Webster’s College Dictionary defines
evil as “morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked; harmful or injurious; due to actual
or imputed bad conduct or character; evil quality, intention or conduct.” I contend that the definitions of evil are
all socially constructed and socially defined in particular contexts. In other words, behaving evilly, producing
evil and being evil are radically social processes which are defined in a given
social context or time and place.
The
definitions of evil are also tautological—that is, the definitions involve
circular reasoning. One may be labeled as evil because one does
evil things, and if one does evil things, then one is evil. This tautology is problematic because a
circular argument cannot be tested or falsified. As a result, the tautological definition of
evil can be exploited by those who apply the label of evil to an individual or
group. How? If the labelers’ arguments cannot be
falsified, then their claims are not subject to meaningful debate or critique
by skeptics. Once a disvalued individual
or group is socially defined as evil, those in power have the moral authority
and even obligation to
eliminate the evildoer(s) regardless of whether or not there is an objective
threat to society. Therein lies the danger in the social construction of evil. It certainly didn’t matter that those who
were convicted of witchcraft in colonial New England were not actually witches
at all. They were sentenced to death and
executed, nonetheless. It is important
to remember this powerful historical lesson.
When
we apply the label of evil to a disvalued individual or group without proper
inquiry, the consequences can be dire.
Dr. Scott Bonn is Professor of Sociology and
Criminology at Drew University and a media expert. He is the author of
the critically acclaimed book “Mass Deception: Moral Panic and the U.S. War on Iraq” and is
currently writing a book about finding hope and redemption behind prison
walls. Follow him @DocBonn on Twitter
and visit www.docbonn.com
